Michael Moore and the ‘overthrow’ he doesn’t want to see
Earlier on the Friday OPEN beer thread, “terps” linked to a clip about Michael Moore appearing on Keith Olbermann’s show. “terps” wrote that Moore “was intimating a violent overthrow of the rich.”
Actually Moore was advocating for exactly the opposite. He quoted New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg saying that if people don’t get jobs now, there’s going to be riots in the streets. And here’s the money quote, which somes right around 4:14 of the video below:
“The smart rich know they can only build the gates so high, and, and sooner or later history proves that people when they’ve had enough aren’t going to take it anymore, and it’s much better to deal with it nonviolently now, through the political system, than what could possibly happen in the future, which nobody wants to see.”
See if for yourself. (h/t to terps but not his interpretation)
September 23, 2011 - 2:00 PM
DAN
A bandit holds you at gunpoint and demands that you hand over your wallet because “nobody wants to see” violence. Does the bandit then get to claim he is a peace advocate because he prefers the peaceful transfer of wealth?
Also,does it matter that the victim worked for the money and the bandit did not?
TERPS
Somebody waves a sign in your face. Is that the same as waving a gun?
“Somebody waves a sign in your face. Is that the same as waving a gun?
Comment by Dan Casey — September 23, 2011 @ 2:39 pm ”
I see you cant answer the question
What other reaction could one expect when it has now become painfully obvious the Republicans are keeping the economy in the tank for political advantage?
Moore is not waving a sign. He is implying that there will be violence that “nobody wants” unless there is a government supervised transfer of wealth from the rich to the poor.
Dan, we both have Irish roots. I know you can spot an implied threat when you see one.
I am not willing to sit through a video of Michael Moore (who IS a rich person by the way), but his quote doesn’t really apply to the current situation is the U.S. The happy fact of the matter is, we are almost ALL rich in this country. I am sure people feel financial pressure, but look at it from a historical perspective. Most families have luxuries that even the super wealthy couldn’t have imagined having just 50 years ago. Big screen televisions with hundreds of channels, newspapers, books and music available via the internet (even the poor can go to a public library), phones you can take almost anywhere and get reception, and the list just goes on. Too many have purchased these “must haves” at the expense of saving money for possible bad times. Some may resent the rich, but the “peasants at the gate” scenario isn’t likely any time in the forseeable future.
The reality is only when you have a socialist country do the spoiled do-nothings riot. Look at Greece.
Right now in our coutnry the top 5% are footing 95% of the federal income tax burden, and when it gets that close, the lazy become very indignant if we aren’t paying the full 100%.
As Michael Moore, Terps was right. The fat f*** is indeed suggesting the idea of the lazy asses rioting, which is tantamount to threatening it.
We actually owe a lot to Moore. He helped get Bush re-elected. One of the smartest things the RNC did was to invite him to the convention. He promptly made an ass of himself and millions saw it.
#5 I think Mr. Moore is trying to show that in the past history when the gap between rich and poor and that gap produces not a good result.It has been repeating many times and who is to say it does not happen again in the future. Get people really mad and hungry and it does not take a scientist that something is going to explode.
Get people really mad and hungry and it does not take a scientist that something is going to explode.
The poor in America aren’t hungry. They’re overweight. How many of the world’s poor get food stamps to drive through fast-foods? The left in this country make a mockery of true poverty as seen in third-world countries.
“The first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class, to win the battle of democracy. The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e. of the proletariat organized as the ruling class; and to increase the total of productive forces as rapidly as possible. Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property…” I had thought at first that Mr. Moore was as contradictory as Communism, since he himself could probably be called “rich”. Then I realized that he really is not one of the “smart rich”. He’s just “rich”.
Dan
My God. They can’t read. They can’t see. They don’tlisten. And they will never comprehend. I’ve got mine. To hell with the rest of you! That is the attitude that creates autocratic empires and despots. And it is also the attitude that ultimately destroys them. When they forget and disdain the people who do the work that creates their wealth, they are doomed to fall.
M Moore is an idiot pure and simple…along with tons of other high profile types like him. Funny part is that the rank and file libs like those commenting above simply continue to publically support the stupidity of people like Moore. I really wonder if the actually have different thoughts that they keep to themselves….probably not. Now we are also seeing the libs crying that conservatives want to “destroy the country for their own good.” “They got theirs, to hell with the rest of you”….and on and on. What’s wrong with these libs? Fact is that any wealthy person who earned their wealth understand the source of wealth is in the ability to build and support it. It cannot be built and sustained in an environment of poverty like that which exists in “3rd world countries”. Additionally, there must be a viable consuming population with adequate income to acquire products and services. Poverty does not support wealth. Wealth supports wealth.
I think it would be a good idea to add this:
http://today.yougov.com/news/2011/09/23/problems-president-americans-give-him-lowest-appro/
If you libs actually were endowed with brains you would get people like Moore and others to either stay quiet OR maybe to come out in support of the R’s. As it stands, they are probably as big of a negative on the current administration and your lib causes as the actual consequences of the misguided but well meaning libs. I’ll once again say middle independent America sees idiots like Moore supporting bamma and they have to KNOW they want no part of someone who attracts a following like Moore. I mean this would be like Hitler giving obamma a medal. It’s not something you would put at the top of your list of achievements nor boast about. But still people like dan and his followers eat it up. Dan could do his cause by keeping Moore out of the picture.
Back to the poll, More good news for the R’s.
Al is rambling again.
Does Al ever not ramble on?
#15 Art, I’m not sure the RT computers have the capacity to handle it if we note every time Al starts rambling.
Al acknowledges that wealth creates wealth and that good paying jobs that give people the resources to be consumers and create demand are the answers to our economic problems. Then he turns around and voices support for the party that has overseen the development of the widest disparity in income, has supported policies that moved jobs away, That is attacking middle class workers through atteempting to destroy their collective bargaining rights, that wants to cut or do away with the minimum wage,
and that thinks that health care for all those middle class workers should be left to the whims of big insurance, big pharma, and giant for profit health conglomerates. You can’t have it both ways Al. You just argued against yourself.
” The reality is only whenyou have a socialist country do the spoiled do nothings riot.” More Suzie craziness. How about the Boston Tea Party,
The Whiskey Rebellion, Birmingham Bridge just to name a few. I could take the time to go back in American history and give you dozens of riots, but you’d just ignore them or make some other outlandish unsupported claim all full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
A lit of incidents of civil unrest and rebellion in the United States from the 1600′s to the present. Guess we’ve been a socialist country all those years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/list_of_incidents-of_civil_unrest_in_the_united_states
Re: #20
“Guess we’ve been a socialist country all those years.”
———-
Come on, Dave
You know that she talks in code and no one can be expected to understand her.
See her admission, “Fortunately, I [Suzie] get to decide what I [Suzie] mean.” — #46 @ http://tinyurl.com/44ee4mg
By her own declaration her comments are only to be understood by her.